the blemish of prostitution. In some it was more, in others less
prevalent; but in all it existed in one form or another. In examining
the manners of the ancient nations, Hebrews, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans,
Celts, and Anglo Saxons, we find women who degraded themselves from
vanity, lust, or for gain; and, among the old communities of the East,
less known to us, public immorality was a characteristic. We shall
show this to have been the case, and, basing our statements on the
most creditable authority, indicate the principal features of each
system. The information, it is true, which has been bequeathed to us,
and elucidated by the learning and diligence of numerous scholars, is
far from complete; but enough may be collected among the antiquities
of Israel, Greece, Rome, and Egypt, to establish a fair opinion. The
general design of this inquiry will be to draw a view of the position
occupied by the female sex in different ages and countries, to measure
the estimation in which it was held, to fix the accepted standard of
morality, to ascertain the recognised significance of the marriage
contract, the laws relating to polygamy and concubinage, the value
at which feminine virtue and modesty were held, and thus to consider
the prostitute in relation to the system of which she formed a part.
_She_ will be the particular object of investigation; but the others
are by no means unimportant. They are, indeed, necessary to a just and
comprehensive view of the question before us. In a society where men
lived in brutal promiscuousness with the women, prostitution could
scarcely exist; where chastity was lightly esteemed, and marriage
held to be a loose contract for social purposes, adultery could
hardly be very full of shame. In this, therefore, as in all other
inquiries, it is necessary to view the actual object in relation to
others which are invariably connected with it. There is no universal,
unvarying standard, by which even prostitution can be measured.
Circumstances, not belonging, yet not entirely foreign to it, are to
be considered. Consequently, while we hold that in view as the main
ground of research, we shall, where materials allow, draw a sketch of
the situation occupied by the female sex, and of the other traits of
civilization to which we have referred.
In a general view, Greece and Rome, with the great city of Babylon,
stand most prominently forward with their system of prostitution.
Closer inquiry, however, induces us to hesitate before assigning
them that distinction. Of the two classical states especially, it is
because our information is more immediate and complete, that their
public immorality is more remarkable. The poets of the earlier, and
the historians of the later, period, have transmitted to us numerous
accounts of the manners and customs of Greece and Rome; their painters
have left us views,--their architects and sculptors, monuments of
their civilization. Their moralists and satirists have enlarged on the
prevalent vices, and from all these sources we are enabled to derive
clearer ideas of their women, and especially their prostitution.
Besides, in a polished state, with pure manners the prostitute class
will always be more distinct, and therefore more conspicuous.
Babylon, far more than a thousand years ago, was a proverb of
immorality. Her name and the name of Whore have been associated ideas,
not on account only of the idolatry practised by her people, but on
account of their licentious manners. Concerning Egypt, though Diodorus
and Herodotus wrote of it, little is known; of the marriage ceremony
absolutely nothing. The prostitutes are not described; but, from every
trace and record of their civilization which has been preserved, it
is evident that a large class addicted itself to this calling. Who
were the public musicians, disreputable in the eyes of all other
persons?--who were the dancers who performed their wanton feats at the
entertainments of the rich, and stripped themselves half, or entirely,
naked before their couches?--who were the drunken women, who bared
their bodies, and capered in that state on the Nile boats, during the
festival of Bubastis?--who were they who assisted at the sacerdotal
orgies, which defiled the temples of ancient Egypt?--who could they
have been, but women of abandoned character, who prostituted themselves
for vile purposes, for gain or pleasure?
Among the Jews, again, the continually reiterated allusions to harlots,
in the Scriptures, the abominations perpetually charged to their
account, the threats pronounced upon their wickedness, the frequent
allusions to their licentious manners, indicate a wide prevalence of
this system. Among a people so commonly guilty of nameless crimes,
we cannot expect to find chastity a peculiar virtue. Indeed, it is
seldom such vices are practised until all the inferior offences against
decency have become insipid through satiety. The writers, therefore,
who parade before us the civilization of the Jews, as an example of
public morality, base their conclusions on a strange interpretation of
facts. To contrast them with the manners of Attic Greece, is a pure
satire on common sense. Sparta was licentious, but not in the low and
gross manner of the Jews. Athens harboured a licentious class; but none
like those bestial voluptuaries among the Hebrews, in whom lust became
a loathsome passion. Although, therefore, the actual manners of ancient
Israel have been less vividly described than those of Greece, it is
evident from the tenour of Scripture history, that morality there was
less pure than in the Attic state.
Rome, under the republic, was, perhaps, still farther removed from
the charge of corruption. Prostitutes it had, and brothels; but its
women were generally virtuous. The chastity of the Roman matron has
passed into a proverb. It was, however, if we may credit the historian
Tacitus, exceeded by the modesty of the women in ancient Germany. Among
them morals appear purged of licentiousness. Polygamy was forbidden,
and practised only by the petty kings who set themselves above the law.
The manners of the people, rather than the enactments of their code,
prohibited divorce. Adultery, rare as it was, ranked as an inexpiable
crime; while seduction was condemned, and prostitution unknown. It was
not, however, the severity of the law which enforced the virtue; it
was the virtue that imparted its spirit to the law. From the morals
of ancient Germany, the lawgivers of society might learn many useful
lessons. Bars and bolts, multiplied walls, troops of eunuchs, jealous
lattices, and the dread of punishment, failed to guard the harems of
the East; while the hut of the German barbarian, open on all sides,
was impregnable against the seducer. The poor toy of the Persian’s
seraglio, protected by a hundred devices, often eluded them all; but
the German women were the guardians of their own honour. They may be
described as possessing all the virtues, without the vices, of the
stern Spartan stock; and, living on terms of equality with the men,
held their virtue at too dear a price to prostitute it for admiration,
or lust, or money. Civilization, in this respect, has done the Germans
a very ill office.
Allied to these fierce wanderers in the Hyrcynian wood were the Saxons,
from whom our ancestors descended. We shall find among them, on their
native soil, similar manners, especially in the circumstance of the
adulteress being whipped without mercy through the village. Among
them prevailed, however, an enlightened reverence for the female sex,
which contrasted strongly with the ideas of many surrounding nations,
who looked on a woman as a creature merely dedicated to the service
and gratification of man. They brought over to England institutions
susceptible of being moulded to a different form. They became more
refined and less moral. Whenever, indeed, rude men, who have not given
themselves up to the indulgence of their low physical appetites, turn
from the chase, from war, and similar rough occupations, to the framing
of laws, to the formation of society, to any intellectual exercise, it
appears natural that other propensities should be awakened in them,
and of these the sensual always form a part. It is, consequently,
interesting to study the progress of manners from stage to stage of
civilization, from the rudest tribe to the most refined community.
We shall occupy ourselves first with the Hebrew republic, and then
with the monarchy which succeeded it. From Israel we proceed to Egypt,
related to it in various ways. Thence our attention will be directed
to Greece, which offered models to the statesmen and public economists
of all time. The contrast between the Ionic and the Doric states will
be presented. Then we shall proceed to Rome, which will lead us to the
Anglo-Saxons, others being incidentally noticed by the way.
In all, as far as our limits and our materials will allow, a sketch
of the condition of women, the national ideas of feminine virtue,
the laws of marriage, and the extent of prostitution, will be given;
and thus the reader will be prepared to enter on the wider field of
modern society abroad. This will be divided into the barbarous and the
civilized; and of the barbarous, the hunters, fishers, shepherds, and
tillers of the soil, may be separately noticed.
The account of every ancient people will not be equally complete,
because the sources of information are not so. Thus of Egypt, its
marriage-customs are wholly unknown; of the Anglo-Saxons, although the
learning and industry of Sharon Turner have been employed upon them,
our knowledge is extremely imperfect. Even Rome and Greece, though
they present us with the general features of their social systems,
disappoint us when we search into details. Nevertheless, the reader
may be enabled, as we have before said, to form a just idea of the
condition of women in antiquity; for the researches of modern scholars
have succeeded, at least, in laying bare the principal roots of the
ancient system, upon which all the institutions of existing society
are, in one form or another, established.
OF PROSTITUTION AMONG THE JEWS AND OTHER ANCIENT NATIONS.
A slight and rapid view of the subject in connection with the Jews, and
more obscure nations of antiquity, is all that can here be attempted.
With reference to the republic of the Hebrew race, though the ingenuity
of modern writers has built up very pleasing theories, described as the
manners and customs of the Jews, we can look nowhere for information
except to the Bible, and, in a later age, to Josephus.
The position of woman among the Jews was by no means exalted. She was
seldom consulted by her friends, when an union with her was desired
by a wealthy suitor. Indeed, in the patriarchal times she was regarded
more as her husband’s property than as his companion. Such must
invariably be the case where polygamy and concubinage are institutions
of society. At a still earlier period the customs of society were even
more at variance with our ideas. Of course the sons of Adam must have
married their sisters, and the practice continued after the necessity
for it had ceased. Abraham formed such an union without exciting
surprise. The patriarchs permitted men to wed two sisters at once,
but the law of Moses brought a reform of marriage customs among the
Jews[16]. They discontinued the intercourse between blood-relatives
long before it was abandoned by the surrounding nations. Marriages
with sisters not by the same mother were forbidden in the Mosaic code.
Previously, however, none were unlawful except those of a man with his
mother, or mother-in-law, or full sister. In the new dispensation the
widow of a deceased brother was placed within the prohibited degree of
consanguinity.
The laws against adultery were severe; death was ordained for both
the guilty persons, and the punishment appears always to have been by
stoning. Many victims, doubtless, perished under this cruel code; but
the example of Jesus Christ gave a new lesson to mankind. The woman was
brought before him, and the Jews claimed her condemnation. They asked
him “should she be stoned.” Had he said no, they might have charged
him with favouring adultery, and denying the Mosaic law; had he said
yes, the Romans might have impeached him, for they had assumed the
distribution of justice, and abolished the punishment of death for
adultery. But he evaded their malice, and gave the law of mercy. “Let
him that is without sin among you cast the first stone.” They all went
out, and when he was alone with her he said, “Hath no man condemned
thee?” She answered, “No man, Lord.” And he again said, “_Neither do I
condemn thee--go, and sin no more_.”
That sentence should ever be in remembrance when we frame our moral
code.
Adultery, however, was a crime only to be committed with a married
woman, or one who was betrothed. The man’s marriage placed him under no
obligation to abstain from intercourse with other than his wife. Wives
to the number of four were allowed, while concubinage was unlimited.
The first wife, however, was superior to the others. Jealousy,
therefore, among the Jewish women could not have been a powerful
feeling. Indeed we find strong proofs to the contrary. When Sarah found
herself barren, she gave Hagar, her Egyptian maid, to Abraham, as a
concubine or inferior wife. Other women, frequently, on discovering
themselves to be sterile, begged their husbands to procure another
companion of the bed, that they might not die childless. Similar
instances are common in the social history of the East.
Marriage with an idolater was forbidden; but a man might marry a
proselyte captive. When he saw a beautiful woman among his prisoners
of war, he was to take her home, shave her head, pare her nails,
change her raiment into that of a free person, and as he had _humbled_
her, was forbidden to make merchandise of her again. The possession,
nevertheless, of two wives by a private individual was a rare thing.
Popular feeling was generally averse to it. The personages who most
commonly practised it were the great men and kings, who were most
expressly prohibited. In the Book of Deuteronomy, when the degraded
Israelites had clamoured for a king, the law was given, “Neither
shall he multiply wives to himself, so that his heart turn not away.”
No command was more frequently broken in the palaces of Israel.
David had an immense harem; it seemed to be reckoned among the
regalia. Solomon, who married Pharaoh’s daughter, had seven hundred
wives--princesses--and three hundred concubines; but we find that he
“did evil in the sight of the Lord,” and that “his heart was turned
away.”
Respecting the children born to these parents there was a change in
the law. In _Genesis_ a man was allowed to transfer the inheritance
to a favourite child; but, probably from the many flagitious actions
committed, it was in Deuteronomy ordained, that if a man had two wives,
of whom he hated one and loved the other--each bearing a child, the
first-born, whether of the loved or the hated woman, should enjoy the
right of inheritance.
From all the passages in Scripture referring to this subject, it
appears that women among the Jews held but an indifferent position,
being made the subject of barter, and that marriage was not a sacred
but a civil institution,--a legal bond, which might be broken by a
legal act. Matches were usually made by the woman’s kindred, she
herself being a secondary actor in the transaction.
Throughout the Bible, notwithstanding, we find women held by the
inspired writers in great respect, their treatment by the rebellious
Jews, as they sank through various degrees of corruption, being
continually set forth among the abominations practised by that
flagitious people.
In the Scriptures we discover innumerable references to women, and to
prostitutes in particular; but, collecting and comparing them all, we
find for our present purpose materials by no means abundant: there is
no exact information. Prostitutes, we know, existed, and we are told
in what estimation they were held; that they stood at the corners of
streets, that they practised many seductive arts, and sold themselves
at a very cheap rate: but how many they were, how they lived, what was
the nature of their places of resort, we are left uninformed, or guided
only by obscure allusions. Nevertheless, sufficient is known upon which
to base a view of the condition of women, and the extent of morality
among the most ancient nation recognised in history.
In the book of Genesis, whence we obtain our first glimpses of the
social history of mankind, we find interesting, though imperfect,
sketches of a curious state of society. We meet, even so early as
this, with a woman wearing a veil, not taking her meals in company
with men, living in separate apartments, and presenting a model of the
system still prevalent in the East. Simplicity and luxury in strange
combination characterized the manners of that remote age. Their morals
appear to have been at all times gross; and one of the principal tasks
of legislation was to restrain the licentiousness to which the people
were so prone to abandon themselves. Many barbarous races present at
this day social institutions similar to those of the Jews, whence many
writers have traced them to that stock. It is more probable, however,
that similar manners grow out of a similar condition.
Several writers, we know, contend for the purity of manners among the
Jews, and point to the rigid laws which ruled them. The social history
of mankind, however, if it proves anything, proves this, that it is
not by any means the nation with the severest code which is the most
virtuous. Examples of the contrary might be multiplied. No state,
savage or civilized, could ever have more rigorous laws than Achin and
Japan, and nowhere have the people been more flagitious. While the
Draconic code was in force, morals in Greece went to rot. Consequently,
if we are to consider the Jews to have been a moral people, it must
certainly not be on the ground of their severe laws. Arguing from that,
a contrary inference should be drawn. The direct evidence, however,
tends the other way. Chastity appears to have been by no means a
favourite virtue. Not to allude to the unnatural abominations mentioned
in the Bible, it is certain that there existed a considerable class
of public women, who prostituted themselves to any one for a certain
reward.
The story of Tamar is a curious illustration of this subject. To impose
on Judah, and bear a child by him, and in spite of him, she assumes the
habit and appearance of a regular prostitute. She then goes out, and
sitting down by the highway covers her face. Judah thought her to be
a harlot, “because she covered her face,” which, as the commentators
tell us, it was the custom for such women to do, as among the same
class of females in Persia, in mimicry of a shame they did not feel.
Judah speaks to her, and says, “Go to, I pray thee, let me come in unto
thee.” She answers, “What wilt thou give me, that thou mayest come in
unto me!” He promises to give her a kid from his flock, but she demands
a pledge; this he gave, and went with her.
The circumstance is related in a manner which seems to show that the
practice was common with men, nor does any particular disgrace appear
to attach to it. When, however, Judah learns that his daughter-in-law
Tamar is “with child by whoredom,” he condemns her to the punishment of
death by burning, on the secret being at length revealed to him[17].
We have here a singular illustration of manners among the primitive
tribes of that great family of mankind. The corruption of manners
reached, it is probable, a high degree before the laws were given.
Where concubinage was practised, feminine virtue could not be held as
a precious possession. The intercourse accordingly of a married man
with an unmarried woman was esteemed simply as a proof of deficient
chastity. At the same time, the encouragement of prostitution, or
“the feeding of whores,” is denounced as the conduct of foolish
and profligate men, who unwisely waste their substance. The class
of prostitutes was held in very low esteem; they were, in general,
foreigners and heathens, and are spoken of usually as “strange women.”
Delilah, who beguiled Sampson, was probably a Philistine, though it is
not certain that she was not an Israelite. At any rate, there appear
to have been many Jewish women, of the lowest order, who followed this
degrading occupation. To render them as few as possible, a law was
passed forbidding men, under severe penalties, from bringing up their
daughters to prostitution for gain. Legislation, however, could not
entirely restrain the vicious from such a course of life.
Apparently the prostitutes, among the Jews, sometimes obtained
husbands. Priests, however, were forbidden on any account to marry
a harlot, or indeed any woman with even a breath of imputation on
her fame. For the daughter of a priest, who took to the calling of
a prostitute, the punishment was death by burning. For any woman it
was infamous, but in spite of what was laid down in the law, or by
the public opinion of the Jews, cities never wanted prostitutes, and
women walked the streets, or stood in groups at the corners, ready to
entrap the young men who came forth in quest of pleasure. Among the
exhortations of parents to their sons, and of patriarchs to youth, we
always find an injunction to beware of strange women, which implies a
considerable prevalence of the system. The readers of the Bible will
at once remember the many passages of this kind contained in that
volume[18].
With respect to prostitution among the Jews, an illustration is
afforded by the story of the two mothers who came before Solomon for
judgment. They were _harlots_, though bearing children, and they
said they dwelt in one house, and “there was no stranger with us in
the house.” Another is afforded by the account of the two men whom
Joshua sent out as spies. They came into a harlot’s house at Rabbah--a
brothel, in fact, where, as at Rome in the Imperial age, the woman sat
impudently, without a veil, at the door, and solicited the passers
by. They wore peculiar clothing. In addition to the vile customs of
the East, we find, “Thou shalt not bring into the temple the price of
a whore.” This was to guard against the introduction of a practice
not uncommon among some ancient and modern nations, of the priests
enriching themselves and their temple by hiring out prostitutes[19].
Another state, known to us from Scripture, is Babylon, surnamed the
Whore, as well from its profligacy as its idolatry. The one, indeed,
was accompanied by the other. Luxury and debauch were carried to
the highest excess. The Temple of Venus,--a goddess known there as
Mylitta,--was sacred to prostitution. The priests had, in immemorial
time, invented a law that every woman should once in her life present
herself at the temple, and prostitute her body to any stranger who
might desire it. Consecrated by religion, this act appeared odious to
few of the Babylonian citizens. The woman came, dressed brilliantly,
and crowned with a garland of flowers; she sat down with her companions
in a place where the strangers who filled the galleries might observe
and make choice of their victims. Numbers were found always ready
enough to enjoy the privilege procured for them by the priests. When
a man had selected one of the women who pleased him most, he came
down, and making her a present of money, which she was compelled to
take, took her hand and said, “I implore in thy favour the goddess
Mylitta!” He then led her to a retired spot and consummated the
transaction. Having once entered the temple it was impossible for any
ordinary woman to return home without having prostituted herself.
Nevertheless, the priests allowed some ladies of rank and wealth to
make a bargain for their chastity, which they probably desired to
dispose of more agreeably to their own caprice. These few privileged
persons went through the ceremonies without performing the usual act of
prostitution. At the taking of Babylon by Cyrus, men were found ready
to hire out their daughters and prostitute them for profit, while in
the Alexandrian age men sent their wives to strangers for a sum of
money[20].